Questions about the new Mac G5 speed issues at DVinfo.net

Joe Carney · June 24th, 2003, 01:11 PM

here is a link to a site that disputes the new speed claims made by Apple about the G5 being the fastest cpu.

http://www.haxial.com/spls-soapbox/apple-powermac-G5/

Whether or not you agree with him, his points are valid. Please read the whole article before jumping to conclusions.

Still, the new Macs will be significantly faster than the existing ones and that will be good for FCP users everywhere. I don't think it will matter if the new G5 is absolutely fastest or not, what will matter is FCP users will get things done a lot faster then they are now.
Still very expensive though.

Using the new PCI-X bus and AGP8 will make for huge improvments where it counts, in moving data around the system. The new bus and graphics speeds are what's going to make the MAC the premier affordable HD editing system. Steve Jobs hype not withstanding.

Intel is doing similar with PCI-X, and the new 800mhz FSB. AMD is the one in trouble for the short term.

BTW, one of the reasons I will not buy a MAC for personal use is the ugly venal reactions one gets when ever someone dares to contradict Apple hype. This guy posted several choice examples at the end of the article. Really reflects bad on the MAC community. I hope they are not typical.

Nigel Moore · June 25th, 2003, 03:35 AM

Some good points there, particularly concerning the use of compilers, but I find al this who's fastest stuff to be a bit petty.

I'm building a new PC edit box to be based on 2.6 or 2.8GHz P4. I will never own the fastest PC in the world, or even the fastest in its class. Why? Because you pay an eye-watering premium for it, and it doesn't stay fastest for long. Coupled with the fact that 'fastest' is often a factor of perspective or tweaking.

So what's the point? As long as its fast enough, that's good enough.

Joe Carney · June 25th, 2003, 11:46 AM

that is one nice thing about the PC world, Plenty of speed options. I no longer get the fastest/bestest cpu. they are too expensive. Getting the second or third fastest is plenty good and saves hundreds of dollars.

Still, fastest PC or not, this will be a great improvement for Mac users.

The hype over fastest PC is directed toward PC users, not Mac ones. Apple has been feeding off it's user base for a too long and is trying to expand actual market share (currently less than 10%).
This isn't the way to do it. Intelligent, rational, mature Mac users do more for Apple than anything else.

Boyd Ostroff · June 25th, 2003, 01:31 PM

Well I've used Macs exclusively since they were introduced, and Apple ]['s before that (plus linux servers running on PC hardware). I pretty much take it for granted that Apple exaggerates all these speed claims. So when I saw the latest ones it was a bit of a yawn. However, that certainly doesn't mean I don't want a G5 ;-) But anyone who has been around for a few years has learned that early Apple adopters pay a pretty high premium. I will probably upgrade after the G5 has been around for several months and the 64 bit OS is available.

Chasing the fastest machines is a costly business. I'm still using a G4/733 and am reasonable content. However when I'm working on a big 3d modeling or DV project I do start to want something faster. But it's such a hassle to move everything to new hardware and discover all the new "gotcha's".

I do realize that certain things can be faster on a PC, and prices are generally lower. But that simply isn't enough to make me want to switch.

Matt Stahley · June 25th, 2003, 05:15 PM

I'm with you Boyd. I'm on a 867 QS and am still satisfied though i've never worked on a dual processor machine before so i dont know the difference.I'm sure its noticeable but i dont know if a little speed boost is worth all the $ you gotta put down again.

Christopher Go · June 25th, 2003, 05:32 PM

AMD isn't in trouble so long as their Opteron processors deliver as the preliminary benchmark shows (but a lot has yet to be seen). These 64 bit processors are available now but not in large numbers and there are no boards with AGP on them (the first implementations are for server boards with workstations to follow later). Microsoft has already announced support for Opterons in their upcoming 64-bit Windows.

I'm glad Apple's finally released better systems. Offers a new balance again even if 3/4 of the new Macs were already implemented for PCs months back (Serial ATA, AGP 8X, PCI-X, etc).

Joe Carney · June 25th, 2003, 07:08 PM

I would like to add one thing about price.
If you bought a dual Xeon with a gig of ddr400 ram and scsi and all the latest greatest stuff, you would end up with a system even more expensive than the new Macs. And still be 32bit.

As far as Athlon, yes the 64bit Opteron is great but doesn't offer the hyperthreading tech that will be in the new x86 64bit chips coming out from Intel. They might be able to implement on chip hypertransport and make a 2in1chip to compete.

Everytime I go to CompUSA and see those Macs, Obewan warns me about giving in to the dark side of the force. So far, I've listened. but for how long? How long can I resist? oh my.....I can feel it drawing me, seducing me.....hehehehehehehe.

June 24th, 2003, 01:11 PM	#1
Joe Carney Inner Circle Join Date: Jul 2002 Location: Centreville Va Posts: 1,828	Questions about the new Mac G5 speed issues here is a link to a site that disputes the new speed claims made by Apple about the G5 being the fastest cpu. http://www.haxial.com/spls-soapbox/apple-powermac-G5/ Whether or not you agree with him, his points are valid. Please read the whole article before jumping to conclusions. Still, the new Macs will be significantly faster than the existing ones and that will be good for FCP users everywhere. I don't think it will matter if the new G5 is absolutely fastest or not, what will matter is FCP users will get things done a lot faster then they are now. Still very expensive though. Using the new PCI-X bus and AGP8 will make for huge improvments where it counts, in moving data around the system. The new bus and graphics speeds are what's going to make the MAC the premier affordable HD editing system. Steve Jobs hype not withstanding. Intel is doing similar with PCI-X, and the new 800mhz FSB. AMD is the one in trouble for the short term. BTW, one of the reasons I will not buy a MAC for personal use is the ugly venal reactions one gets when ever someone dares to contradict Apple hype. This guy posted several choice examples at the end of the article. Really reflects bad on the MAC community. I hope they are not typical.

June 25th, 2003, 03:35 AM	#2
Nigel Moore Major Player Join Date: May 2003 Location: Switzerland Posts: 358	Some good points there, particularly concerning the use of compilers, but I find al this who's fastest stuff to be a bit petty. I'm building a new PC edit box to be based on 2.6 or 2.8GHz P4. I will never own the fastest PC in the world, or even the fastest in its class. Why? Because you pay an eye-watering premium for it, and it doesn't stay fastest for long. Coupled with the fact that 'fastest' is often a factor of perspective or tweaking. So what's the point? As long as its fast enough, that's good enough.

June 25th, 2003, 11:46 AM	#3
Joe Carney Inner Circle Join Date: Jul 2002 Location: Centreville Va Posts: 1,828	that is one nice thing about the PC world, Plenty of speed options. I no longer get the fastest/bestest cpu. they are too expensive. Getting the second or third fastest is plenty good and saves hundreds of dollars. Still, fastest PC or not, this will be a great improvement for Mac users. The hype over fastest PC is directed toward PC users, not Mac ones. Apple has been feeding off it's user base for a too long and is trying to expand actual market share (currently less than 10%). This isn't the way to do it. Intelligent, rational, mature Mac users do more for Apple than anything else.

June 25th, 2003, 01:31 PM	#4
Boyd Ostroff Wrangler Join Date: Dec 2002 Location: Mays Landing, NJ Posts: 11,802	Well I've used Macs exclusively since they were introduced, and Apple ]['s before that (plus linux servers running on PC hardware). I pretty much take it for granted that Apple exaggerates all these speed claims. So when I saw the latest ones it was a bit of a yawn. However, that certainly doesn't mean I don't want a G5 ;-) But anyone who has been around for a few years has learned that early Apple adopters pay a pretty high premium. I will probably upgrade after the G5 has been around for several months and the 64 bit OS is available. Chasing the fastest machines is a costly business. I'm still using a G4/733 and am reasonable content. However when I'm working on a big 3d modeling or DV project I do start to want something faster. But it's such a hassle to move everything to new hardware and discover all the new "gotcha's". I do realize that certain things can be faster on a PC, and prices are generally lower. But that simply isn't enough to make me want to switch.

June 25th, 2003, 05:15 PM	#5
Matt Stahley Major Player Join Date: Jun 2002 Location: Waynesboro, PA Posts: 648	I'm with you Boyd. I'm on a 867 QS and am still satisfied though i've never worked on a dual processor machine before so i dont know the difference.I'm sure its noticeable but i dont know if a little speed boost is worth all the $ you gotta put down again.

June 25th, 2003, 05:32 PM	#6
Christopher Go Major Player Join Date: Nov 2002 Location: Honolulu, HI Posts: 429	AMD isn't in trouble so long as their Opteron processors deliver as the preliminary benchmark shows (but a lot has yet to be seen). These 64 bit processors are available now but not in large numbers and there are no boards with AGP on them (the first implementations are for server boards with workstations to follow later). Microsoft has already announced support for Opterons in their upcoming 64-bit Windows. I'm glad Apple's finally released better systems. Offers a new balance again even if 3/4 of the new Macs were already implemented for PCs months back (Serial ATA, AGP 8X, PCI-X, etc).

June 25th, 2003, 07:08 PM	#7
Joe Carney Inner Circle Join Date: Jul 2002 Location: Centreville Va Posts: 1,828	I would like to add one thing about price. If you bought a dual Xeon with a gig of ddr400 ram and scsi and all the latest greatest stuff, you would end up with a system even more expensive than the new Macs. And still be 32bit. As far as Athlon, yes the 64bit Opteron is great but doesn't offer the hyperthreading tech that will be in the new x86 64bit chips coming out from Intel. They might be able to implement on chip hypertransport and make a 2in1chip to compete. Everytime I go to CompUSA and see those Macs, Obewan warns me about giving in to the dark side of the force. So far, I've listened. but for how long? How long can I resist? oh my.....I can feel it drawing me, seducing me.....hehehehehehehe.